Urgent Resolution Required: Repeated SLA Breach, Hardware Decisions, and Unresolved Router Issue

Dear RSAWEB Support Team,

This is to formally address the unresolved issues surrounding my upgrade request, initiated on 2 December 2024, and the significant delays and service failures that have followed.

Timeline of Events:

2 December 2024:My request for an upgrade was submitted. According to your SLA, this should have been completed within 2–3 working days.

17 December 2024:The new router (Cudy) was delivered after an extended delay. Upon setup, there was no connectivity due to the faulty router.

17 December 2024 (Evening):A fault was logged with Octotel, and I was informed that resolution would take another 2–3 working days.

18 December 2024: I expressed my dissatisfaction via email, detailing the delays and lack of attention to detail. Your team requested that I test a new Ethernet cable, which I did, but this did not resolve the issue.

19 December 2024: Octotel technicians inspected the setup and determined that the fibre box did not need replacement. However, they replaced it with a newer, improved model as a courtesy. Octotel also diagnosed the root cause of the issue as the faulty router (Cudy). Why did RSAWEB determine the fibre box needed to be replaced when the issue was clearly the router?

20 December 2024:A replacement router (TP-Link) was delivered, and connectivity was restored immediately upon installation. This new router did not require configuration, as it matched my original TP-Link router. Why was a Cudy router issued in the first place when a TP-Link router would have been compatible and avoided these unnecessary delays?

20 December 2024 (Courier Misstep):The courier who delivered the replacement confirmed there was no instruction to collect the faulty router, despite earlier assurances from RSAWEB.

28 December 2024: In my email to Cain Adams, I clearly stated that the faulty router could be collected on a day and time convenient for me, specifically 6 January 2025. Despite this, I have been repeatedly ignored. Only after my email on 28 December did I start receiving phone calls from the courier. However, my request for an email address to provide detailed feedback regarding the SLA breaches and the service mishandling has been ignored.

Key Issues:

1. Repeated SLA Breach:Upgrades are supposed to be completed within 2–3 working days. This process has now extended over a month, despite multiple follow-ups and escalations.

2. Failure to Proactively Diagnose and Resolve Issues:

Octotel identified the issue as a faulty router, not the fibre box. Why was the fibre box replacement pursued unnecessarily by RSAWEB?

The use of a faulty Cudy router caused further delays.

3. Inconsistent Hardware Decisions:

My initial router was a TP-Link, which did not require configuration. Issuing a Cudy router, when a TP-Link would have been compatible, highlights poor decision-making.

4. Courier Miscommunication:

The courier who delivered the replacement router had no instruction to collect the faulty unit, adding further inconvenience.

5. Disregard for Customer Input:

I have repeatedly stated that the router can be collected on 6 January 2025. However, my request has been blatantly ignored, reflecting a disgraceful level of service.

6. Service Standards Compared to Competitors:Many competitors provide upgrade services within 2–48 hours via streamlined, self-service options. RSAWEB’s inefficiency in this case is unacceptable.

Demands for Resolution:

Immediate confirmation that the faulty router will either:

Be collected on my specified terms (from 6 January 2025), or

Be written off, closing this matter entirely.

Assurance that such hardware decisions (e.g., issuing incompatible or faulty routers) and unnecessary actions (e.g., fibre box replacement) will be avoided in the future.

A written explanation acknowledging the mishandling of this case, detailing measures RSAWEB will take to prevent a recurrence.

Provision of an appropriate email address where I can send detailed feedback regarding the SLA breaches, mishandling of this process, and the overall experience.

Final Remarks: This experience has caused significant inconvenience, has eroded my trust, wasted my time, and reflects poorly on RSAWEB’s service standards. I expect immediate corrective action and a formal apology from all the role-players resolution of this matter.

I look forward to your urgent response.